00000246 |
Previous | 246 of 406 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
226 10. FINAL APPENDIX. I. BASES;
Now, observe, first, the enormous difference in style between
the bases 1 to 5, and the rest in the upper row, that is to say^
between the bases of Murano and the twelfth and thirteenth
century bases of Venice; and, secondly, the difference between
the bases 16 to 20 and the rest in the lower row, that is to say,
between the bases of Torcello (with those of St. Mark's which
belong to the nave, and which may therefore be supposed to be
part of the earlier church), and the later ones of the St. Mark's
Facade.
Secondly: Note the fellowship between 5 and 6, one of the
evidences of the early date of the Casa Falier.
Thirdly: Observe the slurring of the upper roll into the
cavetto, in 13, 14, and 15, and the consequent relationship
established between three most important buildings, the Rio-
Foscari House, Terraced House, and Madonnetta House.
Fourthly: Byzantine bases, if they have an incision between
the upper roll and cavetto, are very apt to approach the form of
fig. 23, in which the upper roll is cut out of the flat block, and
the ledge beneath it is sloping. Compare Nos. 7, 8, 9, 21, 22,
23, 24, 25, 26. On the other hand, the later Gothic base, 11,
has always its upper roll well developed, and, generally, the fillet
between it and the cavetto vertical. The sloping fillet is indeed
found down to late periods; and the vertical filled as in No. 12,
in Byzantine ones; but still, when a base has such a sloping fillet
and peculiarly graceful sweeping cavetto, as those of No. 10,
looking as if they would run into one line with each other, it is
strong presumptive evidence of its belonging to an early, rather
than a late period.
The base 12 is the boldest example I could find of the exceptional form in early times; butaobserve, in this, that the upper
roll is larger than the lower. This is never the case in late
.Gothic, where the proportion is always as in fig. 11. Observe
f hat in Nos. 8 and 9 the upper rolls are at least as large as the
lower, an important evidence of the dates of the Casa Farsetti
and Fondaco de' Turchi.
Lastly: Note the peculiarly steep profile of No. 22, with
reference to what is said of this base in Vol. II. Appendix 9.
| Title | The stones of Venice - 3 |
| Creator | Ruskin, John |
| Publisher | J. Wiley |
| Place of Publication | New York |
| Date | 1889 |
| Language | eng |
| Type | Books/Pamphlets |
| Title | 00000246 |
| Type | Books/Pamphlets |
| Transcript | 226 10. FINAL APPENDIX. I. BASES; Now, observe, first, the enormous difference in style between the bases 1 to 5, and the rest in the upper row, that is to say^ between the bases of Murano and the twelfth and thirteenth century bases of Venice; and, secondly, the difference between the bases 16 to 20 and the rest in the lower row, that is to say, between the bases of Torcello (with those of St. Mark's which belong to the nave, and which may therefore be supposed to be part of the earlier church), and the later ones of the St. Mark's Facade. Secondly: Note the fellowship between 5 and 6, one of the evidences of the early date of the Casa Falier. Thirdly: Observe the slurring of the upper roll into the cavetto, in 13, 14, and 15, and the consequent relationship established between three most important buildings, the Rio- Foscari House, Terraced House, and Madonnetta House. Fourthly: Byzantine bases, if they have an incision between the upper roll and cavetto, are very apt to approach the form of fig. 23, in which the upper roll is cut out of the flat block, and the ledge beneath it is sloping. Compare Nos. 7, 8, 9, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26. On the other hand, the later Gothic base, 11, has always its upper roll well developed, and, generally, the fillet between it and the cavetto vertical. The sloping fillet is indeed found down to late periods; and the vertical filled as in No. 12, in Byzantine ones; but still, when a base has such a sloping fillet and peculiarly graceful sweeping cavetto, as those of No. 10, looking as if they would run into one line with each other, it is strong presumptive evidence of its belonging to an early, rather than a late period. The base 12 is the boldest example I could find of the exceptional form in early times; butaobserve, in this, that the upper roll is larger than the lower. This is never the case in late .Gothic, where the proportion is always as in fig. 11. Observe f hat in Nos. 8 and 9 the upper rolls are at least as large as the lower, an important evidence of the dates of the Casa Farsetti and Fondaco de' Turchi. Lastly: Note the peculiarly steep profile of No. 22, with reference to what is said of this base in Vol. II. Appendix 9. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| B |
|
| C |
|
| G |
|
| H |
|
| M |
|
| T |
|
| U |
|
| Y |
|
|
|
